Transcending Polarization

A few weeks back, the Hindu American Foundation released a report detailing the persecution of Hindus across the Diaspora, focusing on the countries of Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Fiji. While it was barely noticed in the U.S., the report has sparked controversy in Fiji.

Upon the report’s release, it instantly became a top headline on Fiji’s national evening news program. The Hindu American Foundation asserted that Fiji’s Hindus were systematic targets of hate speech and hate crimes and charged the government with doing little to curb the trend. Among other things, the foundation documented a disturbing number of temple desecrations in recent years.

I expected Fiji’s Hindu community to embrace the report’s findings and call for immediate reform. Instead, top community leaders denounced the report as inflammatory. Kamlesh Arya – the leader of the Hindu sect Arya Samaj and a former Labour party member of Parliament – was cited by the online publication Fijilive as saying that the report only hurt nation building and reconciliation.

To get a better understanding of Arya’s position, I spoke with him on Wednesday. When I asked why he publicly criticized the report, Arya responded as follows:

We viewed the tone of the report as overstating the problem. The tone was really
accusatory – we disagree, we’re on the ground, and we know. The foundation never consulted with us. To make such pronounced statements, which are now available to people worldwide on the Internet, they should have consulted us. Every Hindu group in Fiji found it unacceptable.

We are trying to reconcile and harmonize people, and the content of the report did the opposite. In any environment where there is racial tension which also has a religious bearing then people are required to build bridges of understanding and not point fingers.

Arya has been a leader in combating the desecration of temples. During his time in Parliament (from 2000-2005), he sponsored a motion to curb such acts, which was eventually approved by the ruling government. According to Arya, this was the only motion put forward by the opposition that was approved by the government last session.

I found Arya’s denunciation of the Hindu American Foundation admirable and wise. He very easily could have built on the report’s fiery rhetoric and lashed out against the government for its perceived intolerance. By criticizing it, however, he has now built credibility with the ruling government, which he can use to promote long-term change and unity.

The move shows Arya’s commitment to effectiveness over glory, which is something most Americans could learn from. In America’s polarized political climate, the goal of most politicians, pundits, and non-profits is to pounce on an opponent at every opportunity rather than seek ways to actually get things done. (That said, I’m keeping up my last partisan post because, well, old habits die hard).

Fiji, too, has struggled to transcend the politics of division. Arya’s recent remarks, however, reveal a growing weariness with polarization. Most people are tired of indigenous Fijian and Indo-Fijian leaders (and dittohead followers) butting heads over every issue and would prefer to have a unified government that fosters stability and economic growth. Thus, it was with much fanfare that current Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase invited several members of the opposition into his cabinet.

As I noted in my first post, overcoming ethnic and political polarization will take a steady commitment since differences permeate Fiji’s everyday culture. It’s noteworthy, though, that Fiji’s reconciliation process can be aided by aspects that often characterize local island culture. In “island life,” there’s an affinity for casual living. It’s a nonchalant approach to the world where you don’t take yourself and your work so seriously and where getting along with your neighbor truly matters.

Grog epitomizes Fiji’s island culture. Grog, also called kava or yaqoona, is a local drink that looks like muddy water (and unfortunately kind of tastes like it, too). It’s prepared by wrapping kava roots in a piece of cloth, adding water, and squeezing the mixture into a container. Drinking grog is one of the few national pastimes that transcend ethnic, class, regional, religious and (sometimes) gender differences. It takes place at many social gatherings and day-to-day to pass time. On my first day of research, I visited a secondary school. The principal immediately invited me into his office and asked his assistant to prepare grog. Teachers and other school workers were gathered and we talked about random topics over grog without regard for time or workload (I’m fairly certain that the teachers present had free periods).

The lack of constant stress, intensity, and drama (which is not lacking in the States) and the fondness for laid back living are a few factors that can help Fiji transition to a less polarized political atmosphere.

Republican Racism

Although this is unrelated to my project, I just wanted to express my outrage at the comments of Republican Senator, and 2008 presidential hopeful, George Allen. At a campaign event, Allen made racist comments about S.R. Sidarth, an Indian-American who was tracking Allen's campaign for his senate opponent. Speaking to an all-white audience (aside from Sidarth), he said the following:

''This fellow over here with the yellow shirt -- Macaca [a genus of monkey] or whatever his name is -- he's with my opponent,'' Allen said. ''He's following us around everywhere.''

''Let's give a welcome to Macaca here. Welcome to America and the real world of Virginia.''

S.R. Sidarth was born and raised in Virginia.

Given Senator Allen's past sympathies with the Southern Confederacy (he wore a Confederate flage lapel pin in his high school yearbook photo), I think it's time to question his American credentials.

Musings after a Month

Four weeks ago, I walked across the Fiji airport’s runway to the sounds of guitars from four indigenous Fijians wishing Bula (cheers) to passengers. In baggage claim, an assortment of travel agents lurked about, hawking their travel literature splashed with Fiji’s beautiful beaches and grand palm trees. I have yet to step foot on sand, but over the past few weeks I have experienced the real Fiji, the Fiji with a diverse population that struggles to live in harmony.

I’m based in Fiji’s capital of Suva, a bustling city of 350,000 people. A little more than six years ago in Suva, Mahendra Chaudhry celebrated his one-year anniversary as Fiji’s first Indo-Fijian prime minister. The same day his elected government was overthrown. A group of armed rebels, led by failed businessman George Speight, stormed parliament, taking Chaudhry and others hostage. Soon after, the Speight Team declared that Fiji’s 1997 Constitution was void, and that future governments would favor indigenous rights and be ruled by indigenous Fijians. Chaos ensued as Suva was engulfed with widespread looting and violence targeted at Indo-Fijians. Unfortunately, the country has become all too familiar with this scenario. In 1987, groups advocating for indigenous rights staged two coups, ousting governments perceived as overly influenced by Indo-Fijians.

With the perpetrators of the 2000 coup in prison, and Fiji’s voters electing two governments since the coup, a degree of stability has surfaced in the capital. Indigenous Fijians and Indo-Fijians may ride to work in the same buses and watch the same evening news program, but tensions and differences between the groups continue to run deep. Indigenous Fijians, who make up the majority of the population, own 90 percent of the land, dominate the military and police forces, and run the government. Indo Fijians, who are a sizable minority at roughly 40 percent of the population, control the country’s commercial wealth, dominate the professional fields, and pervade academia. The relative parity of resources between the groups (which has been documented by others such as the U.S. Ambassador David Lyon) has bred mutual resentment and accompanying stereotypes of the Other. The tension between communities has also generated deep pride in their respective cultural traditions, giving both sides a way to gain meaning through self-definition.

Since my arrival, I have immersed myself in Fiji’s multifaceted Indian culture. Among other things, I have watched women from the Indian Cultural Center perform traditional Bharata Natyam and contemporary Bhangra dances, learned (but failed to remember) how to cook traditional Indo-Fijian dishes such as chicken and fish curries, attended daily Hindu worship and observed larger rituals such as the Nakul Navmi (a Gujarati Hindu ritual praising mongooses) and helped serve food and put up decorations at a Muslim wedding.

From my varied experiences, I have observed a few key differences that distinguish Indo-Fijian culture from Indian-American culture. For instance, Indo-Fijians are bound together by a common narrative. They tell a story about the coercion of their families into indentured servitude, the suffering they endured under this new form of slavery, the struggle to obtain political rights and economic self-sufficiency after indenture, the resentment they harbor after independence as targets of a nativist backlash by indigenous Fijians, and finally, the community’s economic and educational success against all odds. This story gives Indo-Fijians a common identity – they each came from the same beginning and have the same sense of purpose to carry on the community’s rich legacy.

In the U.S., Indian-Americans do not have a common story to tell. To the extent that one can be assembled, it is not nearly as compelling as the Indo-Fijian. Most Indian-Americans immigrated as well-educated professionals seeking better opportunities for themselves and their children. As a result, a small set of cultural factors bind the community together – observing Hindu holy days such as Diwali and Holi, watching Bollywood movies, being familiar with various kinds of Indian food, and dressing in saris and sherwanis at social functions. While these are elements of Indian culture in Fiji as well, “Indianness” is more richly textured.

For example, there are Hindu temples that cater specifically to South Indians, North Indians, and Gujaratis, complete with gods/goddesses (e.g. the South Indian temple, Mariamma Temple, is dedicated to goddesses such as Durga and Kali, who are especially popular in South India), lengthy worship sessions, and elaborate rituals tailored to each sub-community’s historical and contemporary identity. There are two major sects Islam (the Sunnis and the Ahmadis), a sizable Sikh community with an ornate gurdwara, and an Indian Methodist Church. The Indian community splits off in many different directions, but there is unity in the diversity. They have a common narrative independent of religion and region, and, consequently, are equally Indian even if they have distinct ways of showing it. This is less the case in the U.S. where Indian culture tends to have a Hindu tint as many Muslims identify with Arab Islamic culture, and many Indian Christians assimilate into the majority Christian population.

Another key difference between Indian-Americans and Indo-Fijians concerns national culture. Indian-Americans see themselves as both Indian and American, though not necessarily completely belonging in either category. Indo-Fijian is a term that I have somewhat imposed since popular vernacular categorizes the population as “Indian,” while indigenous Fijians are simply “Fijian.” The popular terminology illustrates the lack of a unifying national culture in Fiji – the “Indians” have their culture and traditions and the “Fijians” have their own. There is little blending of the two and few common national traditions to coalesce around.